Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: rastamon Date: Oct 2, 2008 6:52am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

thanks...a relevant reply, but...hmmm

here's another stupid one..how many politician hatin democrats-picking the lesser of evils, secretly would like to see Joe Biden (a REAL political animal) get his ass handed to him by Gov Palin-(as long as Obama wins anyway).
Maybe a bit like when Ross Parot shook up the scene some ears ago.

I get a weird satisfaction when i see ANY political animal get their smugass tree shaken by some "dumb" upstart

This post was modified by rastamon on 2008-10-02 13:43:06

This post was modified by rastamon on 2008-10-02 13:52:22

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Oct 2, 2008 9:15am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

But Ross Perot at least accomplished something using knowledge of business, not that I'm a fan of his or anything. He at least could formulate his arguements and case based on HIS own thoughts not thoughts that were spoon fed to him.

Palin was fine in contrast to the previous Governor Murkowski. Unlike him she is a lifelong Alaskan who I believe cares somewhat about the State but make no mistake, she got where she did ( Governor ) based on her ability to be miss popularity and based on Murkowski's OVERWHELMING unlikability and unpopularity.

The thought of this person who can't name one fucking newspaper, not ONE ( all she had to do was say she reads news she didn't have to prove she knows how to read ) humiliating someone who has an infinitely higher level of education and experience reminds me of what it's like for me everyday sitting in my breakroom listening to uneducated blue collar workers ( who get all their information and knowledge from Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage ) sitting around bashing the stupid liberals. You know, the stupid liberals who are responsible for bringing these lazy uneducated bitches a wage and benefits they can actually live on because if it wasn't for their union their Republican CEO would contract their ass out in a minute leaving them to have to obtain the job in their prescious private sector that they could actually qualify to get making barely above minimum wage with no benefits.

Yeah, I really want to get my rocks off hearing her snide little soundbites because she is CLEARLY so informed about this world. I really want down home ignorance to triumph over these educated elitists.

And finally - if all of these tongue speaking lunatics already know how the world ends and know they're " gwine upta heaven" ( Zappa ), why can't they just butt the hell out of the future that the rest of us have to live with?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Bob Gnarley Date: Oct 2, 2008 10:18am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

Did you vote for her?, or Muukowski?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: johnnyonthespot Date: Oct 2, 2008 10:24am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

I'm undeclared, not registered for any party so I didn't vote in the Republican primary.

As for the general election it was Palin vs. former Governor ( pre Murkowski ) Tony Knowles. I voted for Knowles, not because I like him that much ( he's too slick for me ) but for the one single reason he helped champion the program Denali Kid Care up here. The single best program aside from the permanent fund that benefits Alaskans. It's proof that the dreaded socialized medicine not only works but works better than private insurance. I didn't qualify for it for my kids but I know a lot of working parents who do and trust me it rocks. Imagine being able to take your kid to the doctor, ANY doctor you choose, anytime they need it and it costs you ZERO. It's not a program for welfare people, it's a program for single parents to moderately low income families. I have never known anyone who was ever turned down service who had it. They cover everything except braces. In contrast I pay a premium every payday, still have a deductible, and still have had to fight and appeal to the bean counters to get a prescription for my kid filled.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Oct 2, 2008 10:56am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

"And finally - if all of these tongue speaking lunatics already know how the world ends and know they're " gwine upta heaven" ( Zappa ), why can't they just butt the hell out of the future that the rest of us have to live with?"

Damn, John, can't tell you how much I agree with that sentiment - absolutely right on the nail. And I totally agree with you as well on the benefits of a central health care system, free at the point of delivery for those who need it. We've had one here since 1946, where everyone contributes through taxes, and in my experience it works. Whatever the whiners might say, if this country adopted an American system of health care there'd be riots in the streets.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Oct 2, 2008 11:25am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

I also pay each and every week and fight for care but I also have the great added benefit that my wife and child have Czech passports, giving me benefits as an EU spouse, so that every year when the family goes back to Prague we get many of our basic needs (annual checkups, exams, etc) taken care of by a former pinkie commie national health care system that is incredibly well run and delivers great service. They (the Czech) are now getting a blend of both nationalized and private health care - so everyone is guaranteed basic levels of health care while those that can can pay for other services if they desire. Not a bad way to go.

Am I the only one offended by the fact that people apparently like Palin because she is just like them? Well then they are morons. When I take my car to the garage, it's because I expect the guy there to do a better job than I can do. Same with my dentist. Seems odd I would not want a better educated, more intelligent person than myself sitting in the Executive Branch (or in Cheney's view, that grey area b/w the Executive and Legislative branches accountable to neither). But what do I know? I'm a left-leaning liberal so therefore my opinons can be immediately discounted and disregarded.

lib·er·al (lbr-l, lbrl)
adj.
1.
a. Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
b. Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
c. Of, relating to, or characteristic of liberalism.
d. Liberal Of, designating, or characteristic of a political party founded on or associated with principles of social and political liberalism, especially in Great Britain, Canada, and the United States.

Or as Les might say:
To defy the laws of tradition, is a crusade only of the brave....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=231PT-5nKhY

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 2, 2008 11:37am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

Couldn't agree more about the analogy (taking in the car). That's why the "prudence" factor we spoke of a while back is sooo important for me. Of course I want someone that will NOT have a knee jerk reaction as CinC! I want them to have had enough experience to absolutely agonize over all the subtle aspects of the crisis, whichever it happens to be, even if it means they appear hamstrung to those that are convinced they have the answers on all that is right and wrong in their black and white world. There will be plenty of time to move forward once a decision has been made (unless you believe we face a number of all or nothing armageddon scenarios where time is of the essence; I think those are few and far between).

The scary thing is, however, that the majority of us US style Americans at any given time just don't measure up to my elist notions of well-educated, critical thinking, historically aware World travelers. At various points in the last 50 yrs, a majority of us has been 1) utterly racist, 2) anti-science, 3) completely sexist, 4) hedonistic selfish bastards. On the other hand, we have 1) literally saved the World once or twice, 2) put a clown or two on the moon, 3) produced the only culture that so rabidly and effectively self-evaluates (witness this thread), and 4) provided the best soundtrack for the whole damn time!

Frustrating as Hell, but wouldn't rather be anywhere else for the time being...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Earl B. Powell Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:19pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

We are a great country despite ourselves.

Believing that the president has near unlimited powers and actually steers the course and welfare of this country is the grand mistake of the American people. Moderation will always prevail in our system of things. Radical legislation whether left or right leaning will never pass muster until it becomes watered down or sold out, the original intent becomes meaningless. All things in government are drawn to or negotiated to the middle - the only place where agreement can be made given our contentious houses.

This is precisely why we continue on. Despite all of our best efforts in electing a bunch of second rate fuck ups, the wisdom of our founding fathers saw to it that a system of checks and balances as well as limited powers would prevent even the worst of presidents from taking us down.


Which means, as Mr. Natural so succinctly put it, "It don't mean shit" when it comes to who you vote for.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

"All things in government are drawn to or negotiated to the middle - the only place where agreement can be made given our contentious houses."

I tend to agree that has been true during the course of most of our history and that we seem to do best when we have one party in control of one branch and another in the other. However, we've had a rubber stamp congress for 6 of the last 8 years that hardly, if ever, bucked the wishes of the administration they now belatedly seek to distance themselves from. That doesn't mean some legislation didn't get watered down, but come on, you think the Patriot Act was a middle of the road piece of legislation? That was rammed through w/o anyone reading or truly debating the same. Indeed, I think one of the biggest problems is people don't really even know what the hell they are voting on when a bill comes up - the true work is in committee and all kinds of extraneous crap gets thrown in the mix.

But at the end of the day, it's still better to own a politician than be one. Just ask Cheney's friends....



Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:39pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

Not to mention the record number (more than 700) of "signing statements" Bush used to avoid override votes for a number of very serious policy issues, especially regarding rendition of "enemy combatants" to sercret CIA torture cells, warrantless wiretapping of US citizens, and much more.

Your point about the Patriot Act is spot on. The world did indeed change since 9/11 and while security should and does remain a vital concern, Bush and Co. have done so much to reduce the very freedoms that makes the US as great a country as it's been, that what we end up keeping "secure" hardly resembles that country at all.

John McCain himself spoke out against the use of torture (and he oughta know), and the efforts by Cheney and co. to rationalize its use should make any real American who wants to be different than the terrorist scum who torture all the time sick to their stomachs.

Add on the despicable attempts to argue that the President alone should have authority to decide whether Habeus Corpus should be denied "enemy combatants" without ANY judiciary review, and you have just a few examples of who you vote for really does matter.

The checks and balances of the 3 branches have never been as out of whack as they are now, and another tilt far right to the Supreme Court could easily put us over the edge. (Although I do give credit to the current bench--even Scalia, who told the Bushies that they had to be kidding with their efforts to take supreme control over habeus--for making the right decision in that particular case).

Still, no matter what your politcal leanings are, we should not be cavalier about electing the people who lead the country. Voting does matter, and for a lot of people, it's the only voice we have. Treat that right like it's nonsense, and you'll end up eventually w/the kind of banana republics they have in the most dangerous parts of the world.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Earl B. Powell Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:37pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

Well, since I'm not much of a terrorist or criminal, I didn't find much wrong with the Patriot Act. It took away less of my personal rights and freedoms than the local smoking ban.

But, I'll agree with you, and since the opposition was not heard from for six years, what exactly were they doing? Were they fighting for and protecting your personal rights at every turn? Were they being good politicians in terms of being true to their ideological leanings?

The short answer is no, fuck no. The democrats in congress let George have his way, just like they did with Reagan...as long as they could bring home the bacon like there was no tomorrow. Spend, spend, spend baby! As long as they could show their constituents the money, save their job for re-election and have a whipping boy to lash at the end of the day, it was happy times. (I won't let the Republicans slide on this issue either.)

I don't know about the rest of y'all, but I've never seen a government spend itself into prosperity. Nor have I seen one tax it's society into prosperity.

I gotta think when it comes to government and politicians both, that less is more.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:58pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

yes and no, Earl.

You make an excellent point about the spineless democrats. They rolled over to Bush like dogs begging for scraps, and did the same w/Reagan. (I'm looking at you, Hillary). They cared more about their elections than standing up to the war in '03, then cried about it later when it all went to hell. No sympathy there.

But I just don't buy the whole "less is more" philosophy. You must have SOME regulation, otherwise it's putting the Foxes (Ken Lays of the world) in charge of the hen house.

Plus, if I'm gonna elect some clown to a six-figure salary job, with all manner of perks and privileges (free health care among them), I expect him or her to do a good deal of fucking work while they're on the job...not just wear a nice suit, go to local ribbon cutttings, collect a paycheck and take money from lobbyists.

Government service is public service, and while I agree spending like a drunken sailor (I'm looking at you, Bush) is no way to go, thinking and acting on new ways of IMPROVING civic life for all of us--keeping roads and bridges in good condition, keeping the air and water clean, etc., is important and I want them to WORK to make it so.

Also, you may not personally feel the effects of the Patriot act, but the taxi driver who was mistaken for a terrorist, held without charges, then beaten and killed.....well, he would probably argue differently if he could (See "Taxi to the Dark Side" or read the book "The Dark Side" for the sickening details of his and other cases similar).

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Oct 2, 2008 1:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

I think it abundantly clear that though the pure ideal of "free market" might be grand, as the pure ideal of socialism might as well, the current situation requires regulation of various sorts; we simply have no way out of that being the case given we have "gub-er-mint" (as Ronnie would have said) doing as much as it does public service wise...we have all sorts of regulations for the common good; the surprising thing is that with respect to the market, we keep going back and forth and not learning from our mistakes (what transactions HAVE to be regulated for the greater good, and which do not, etc., etc.).

Alrighty, we could go on all day; I will say I am looking forward to the clowns tonight, Mr Earl!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: Earl B. Powell Date: Oct 2, 2008 1:46pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

I'm gonna turn the sound down and pretend she's in a Van Halen video.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: grendelschoice Date: Oct 2, 2008 1:57pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

another way of putting it:

In Capitalism, man exploits man.
In Socialism, it's exactly the opposite.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: jglynn1.2 Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:30pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: we done good, and sometimes bad

You are correct. That is why it makes me crazy when people point the finger at one individual (the Pres) concerning triumphs and/or failures during their term, like the Congress & Senate do not exist.

Oh Well. On a side note: The job of president for the next 4 years will be horrible, so we are basically voting 'our' candidate into 4 years of hell. I'm thinking whichever party wins this term will not win the next.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: clashcity Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

* White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

* White privilege is when you can call yourself a "fuckin' redneck," like Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll "kick their fuckin' ass," and talk about how you like to "shoot shit" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug.

* White privilege is when you can attend four different colleges in six years like Sarah Palin did (one of which you basically failed out of, then returned to after making up some coursework at a community college), and no one questions your intelligence or commitment to achievement, whereas a person of color who did this would be viewed as unfit for college, and probably someone who only got in in the first place because of affirmative action.

* White privilege is when you can claim that being mayor of a town smaller than most medium-sized colleges, and then Governor of a state with about the same number of people as the lower fifth of the island of Manhattan, makes you ready to potentially be president, and people don't all piss on themselves with laughter, while being a black U.S. Senator, two-term state Senator, and constitutional law scholar, means you're "untested."

* White privilege is being able to say that you support the words "under God" in the pledge of allegiance because "if it was good enough for the founding fathers, it's good enough for me," and not be immediately disqualified from holding office--since, after all, the pledge was written in the late 1800s and the "under God" part wasn't added until the 1950s--while believing that reading accused criminals and terrorists their rights (because, ya know, the Constitution, which you used to teach at a prestigious law school requires it), is a dangerous and silly idea only supported by mushy liberals.

* White privilege is being able to be a gun enthusiast and not make people immediately scared of you. White privilege is being able to have a husband who was a member of an extremist political party that wants your state to secede from the Union, and whose motto was "Alaska first," and no one questions your patriotism or that of your family, while if you're black and your spouse merely fails to come to a 9/11 memorial so she can be home with her kids on the first day of school, people immediately think she's being disrespectful.

* White privilege is being able to make fun of community organizers and the work they do--like, among other things, fight for the right of women to vote, or for civil rights, or the 8-hour workday, or an end to child labor--and people think you're being pithy and tough, but if you merely question the experience of a small town mayor and 18-month governor with no foreign policy expertise beyond a class she took in college--you're somehow being mean, or even sexist.

* White privilege is being able to convince white women who don't even agree with you on any substantive issue to vote for you and your running mate anyway, because all of a sudden your presence on the ticket has inspired confidence in these same white women, and made them give your party a "second look."

* White privilege is being able to fire people who didn't support your political campaigns and not be accused of abusing your power or being a typical politician who engages in favoritism, while being black and merely knowing some folks from the old-line political machines in Chicago means you must be corrupt.

* White privilege is being able to attend churches over the years whose pastors say that people who voted for John Kerry or merely criticize George W. Bush are going to hell, and that the U.S. is an explicitly Christian nation and the job of Christians is to bring Christian theological principles into government, and who bring in speakers who say the conflict in the Middle East is God's punishment on Jews for rejecting Jesus, and everyone can still think you're just a good church-going Christian, but if you're black and friends with a black pastor who has noted (as have Colin Powell and the U.S. Department of Defense) that terrorist attacks are often the result of U.S. foreign policy and who talks about the history of racism and its effect on black people, you're an extremist who probably hates America.

* White privilege is not knowing what the Bush Doctrine is when asked by a reporter, and then people get angry at the reporter for asking you such a "trick question," while being black and merely refusing to give one-word answers to the queries of Bill O'Reilly means you're dodging the question, or trying to seem overly intellectual and nuanced.

* White privilege is being able to claim your experience as a POW has anything at all to do with your fitness for president, while being black and experiencing racism is, as Sarah Palin has referred to it a "light" burden.

* And finally, white privilege is the only thing that could possibly allow someone to become president when he has voted with George W. Bush 90 percent of the time, even as unemployment is skyrocketing, people are losing their homes, inflation is rising, and the U.S. is increasingly isolated from world opinion, just because white voters aren't sure about that whole "change" thing. Ya know, it's just too vague and ill-defined, unlike, say, four more years of the same, which is very concrete and certain.


This post was modified by clashcity on 2008-10-02 19:02:46

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Oct 2, 2008 11:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

amen. well done.

but what's wrong w/ being sexy/sexist? (think spinal tap)

I read your post and immediately thought of David Chappelle: "White power!"

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: clashcity Date: Oct 2, 2008 12:02pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

Yeah I think the writer meant sexist... Typos abound in that thing, but makes it nonetheless relevant to the myopic comment made above.

The first time I saw that skit I literally was in pain from laughing so much. That and the line - "White people like Wayne Brady because he makes Bryant Gumbel look like Malcolm X."

I'm rich beeotch!

This post was modified by clashcity on 2008-10-02 19:02:20

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: TypicalWhitePerson Date: Oct 2, 2008 11:59am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: top stupid questions series

Membership has its privileges.